30 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2015
    1. Australia’s Gun Ban Results in More Guns Than Ever…New Findings

      This can help me as a counter argument that the simultaneous change from having a gun legally to banning gun ownership completely will not work. We can take Australia as our demonstration that Australia government ban the gun ownership in 1996, yet the result was out of what Australian people expected. It resulted in more illegal guns in the country, which was more dangerous than before the gun ban, since those guns owned before gun ban were registered by the government, whereas guns after gun ban were unregistered. Their government did not have any clue about those guns, for instance model, number and owner. Most importantly, this is not what we want to see in the United States.

  2. Nov 2015
    1. This is most easily explained by the zombies' constant, endless drive to devour meat.

      Can this also explain why zombies in movies and shows tend to become slower when deprived of "food" for too long?

    2. Part of the fungal network grows within the brain, where it interfaces with the medulla and cerebellum, as well as parts of the brain involving vision, hearing and possibly scent

      This would explain what the infection has to do with the brain

    3. This leads us to the following scenario: microscopic spores are inhaled, ingested, or transmitted via zombie bite. The spores are eventually dispersed throughout the body via the bloodstream. Then they lie dormant. When the host dies, chemical signals (or, more accurately, the absence of chemical signals) within the body that occur upon death trigger the spores to activate, and begin growing. The ensuing fungal network carries nutrients to muscles in the absence of respiration or normal metabolism.

      This is a good argument against my claim that zombies have to have a beating heart to function; the body survives on the fungus

    4. fungal infection

      The only fungus I looked at was the one linked to ants... so far.

    1. They don’t understand what their teachers are teaching them and they feel like they are not learning. Our nation can—and should—do more.

      Yes they should. Like letting the students explore and find what they are interested in instead of making them learn things that bore them or are at a higher level than they should be learning.

    2. Eighth-grade students across the country also report that they rarely write lengthy answers to reading questions on tests

      Because they need more time for the large amount of questions that they most likely have yet to answer.

    3. Twenty-nine percent of eighth-grade math students nationwide, for instance, report that their math work is often or always too easy.

      Okay, so what about the other 79% of 8th grade students? They're most likely having trouble in class, but this article can only focus on the 29% of students that are having the easiest time.

    4. .All students, regardless of their family background, should have access to a high-quality education.

      While this is true, what happens once those students get in class? Are they expected to be at the same level as all the others even when they haven't had nearly the same amount of education?

    5. 72 percent of eighth-grade science students say they aren’t being taught engineering and technolog

      Engineering is actually one of the most popular and most needed jobs in this time. We need to give the students a chance to do what they love.

    6. More than a third of high-school seniors report that they hardly ever write about what they read in class.

      Isn't that good though? It's teaching students how to think for themselves and hone their creative talents.

    7. You might think that the nation’s teenagers are drowning in schoolwork. Images of sullen students buried in textbooks often grace the covers of popular parenting magazines, while well-heeled suburban teenagers often complain they have to work the hours of a corporate lawyer in order to finish their school projects and homework assignments.

      That's because it is. From what I've heard and know, it's usually only the students who know the real truth, but they're too afraid to speak out about it for the fear of failing.

    1. I used to go to other officer’s posts, to black neighborhoods, just to make arrests so I could meet my stats.” 

      why would they do that? I think you would be more protective to those who can't protect themselves, and be loyalty to your country. "Meet my stats"

    1. “It still is up to local law enforcement to determine how and when and where and under what circumstances they use excess military equipment,” Kirby told reporters. “We don’t take a position on the way the equipment is being used.”

      Which is wrong. This is why military equipment is misused.

    2. Military vehicles can also be useful for search-and-rescue missions. “When there’s a natural disaster … you [may] need vehicles like a Humvee to go through high water to get to an area that normally you wouldn’t get to,” Johnson said.

      I agree, military equipment can be and is used in natural disasters but by the national guard.

    3. “The bad guys had military-grade body armor … They were able to keep going and shoot and do damage” and the police officers’ regular duty weapons “weren’t doing anything,” he said.

      We have national guard for a reason.

    4. “Unfortunately in America today ... it’s so violent against the police that they really do need that level of protection.”

      Maybe if we're that violent against the police, they can call in the national guard. Also people are sometimes only violent because they are afraid of the police and I would be too if I had a MRAP driving down my street!

    5. Just because the Pentagon doesn’t need a particular item doesn’t mean law enforcement agencies can use it. The logistics agency has to approve every type of item that can be transferred. “No, you can’t have a damn tank,” the official said.

      Well that's something! The police weren't allowed a tank. But don't worry, they're allowed basically everything else it seems like! (sarcasm)

    6. Much of the gear is non-military items, such as office equipment, blankets and sleeping bags, computers, digital cameras and video recorders, binoculars, flashlights, extreme weather clothing, repair tools, first-aid supplies and TVs.

      This could be the answer of what the other 95% is, but still, MRAPs and aircraft aren't needed by police forces.

    7. Some of the items — Humvees, mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles, aircraft (rotary and fixed wing), boats, sniper scopes and M-16s — raise eyebrows. But only about 5 percent of the equipment is weapons, and fewer than 1 percent is tactical vehicles, according to the defense official.

      I highly doubt that only 5% is weapons and less than 1% is tactical vehicles. What would the other 94% of it be then? Military uniforms? Which are also being misused by police officers.

    8. “We don’t push equipment on anybody ...”

      Who wouldn't pass up free military equipment?! Just cause they didn't force the police to take it doesn't mean the police should have it.

    9. The theory behind the initiative was that the military’s unneeded equipment might as well be put to good use, rather than be destroyed or warehoused.

      "The theory", this isn't really a good reason to give police such powerful equipment because they aren't required to have it. The national guard is here for a reason. They even have better equipment that what the police departments are getting so why not let the national guard be in charge of the big equipment here at home?

    10. what safeguards are in place to ensure that weapons and vehicles designed for combat zones are used responsibly in towns like Ferguson?

      Exactly. Who is to make sure the equipment is used correctly when it must be used within a years time in order to be kept, disregarding how it is used.

    1. What Overkill?

      This article is in favor of police departments receiving black helicopters and other military equipment and doesn't see this stuff as "overkill."

    1. Unlike phone calls, there are no clear rules about when it’s acceptable to text.

      Thesis: Communicating via text is a horrible way to converse due to the loss of tone and facial expressions. This leads to a simple misunderstanding of the author's intentions.

      Texting is much more discrete than talking on the phone. It doesn't require the use of ones voice. In some cases, texting may be more appropriate than making or taking a phone call. For example, in a meeting. Just make sure to pay attention to the meeting as well while texting someone quickly!

    2. But over time, the way we communicate—even if we know the way we communicate is “technically” wrong—affects the way we think.

      Thesis: Communicating via text is a horrible way to converse due to the loss of tone and facial expressions. This leads to a simple misunderstanding of the author's intentions.

      Not everyone texts in such a manner. I myself, type out full words, use punctuation marks, and use complete sentences for the most part.

    3. Texting increases the frequency of small talk and can be a great asset to people beginning to form a friendship; they may be much more comfortable texting each other witty one-liners than they are picking up the phone and calling.

      Thesis: Communicating via text is a horrible way to converse due to the loss of tone and facial expressions. This leads to a simple misunderstanding of the author's intentions.

      When we meet a new acquaintance, talking face-to-face can sometimes feel a bit awkward. When we text, we are sometimes more prone to saying things we may not feel all that confident to say to someones face.

    4. The reality may be not that these people are being rude but that they are uncomfortable with slow-paced, in-person communication.

      Thesis: Communicating via text is a horrible way to converse due to the loss of tone and facial expressions. This leads to a simple misunderstanding of the author's intentions.

      Teens aren't necessarily being rude or anti-social. There are certain times where people in general should take a break from their cell phones. If the time and place is appropriate, there should be more understanding. It really depends on the individuals beliefs.

    5. 72% of teenagers text regularly

      Thesis: Communicating via text is a horrible way to converse due to the loss of tone and facial expressions. This leads to a simple misunderstanding of the author's intentions.

      This isn't much to my surprise. teens text frequently because of its convenience to get a hold of friends and family members quickly.

    6. Texting has, in many ways, made communication easier by helping people avoid long, unpleasant phone conversations and making a quick “Hello” much easier.

      Thesis: Communicating via text is a horrible way to converse due to the loss of tone and facial expressions. This leads to a simple misunderstanding of the author's intentions.

      Texting makes communicating convenient and quick. In today's day and age, teens and even adults somewhat demand convenience and quickness.